Ur-Vater der Rohloff Speed 14?

[Andre Jute]

The fellow in the photo is Paul Jaray, the noted and very influential early aerodynamicist (Zeppelin airships, cars, his Tatra influencing Ferdinand Porsche's Volk's Wagen), in 1921 aboard a bicycle of his own design and construction.

Paul Jaray on his J-Rad, 1921. Photo in public domain.

I haven't the faintest idea of how the thing worked, but we can note a few points:

Jaray didn't believe in contorting the human body to fit aerodynamic theories. He sits bolt upright on his bike with a very short virtual top tube and the handlebars reachable with upper arms perpendicular to the ground, then thought to be an ergonomic position.

Finally, and the point of this post: Was that large hublike object at the centre of the rear wheel a forebear of the Rohloff Speed 14? Or even an automatic version of some perpetual motion machine? I imagine the pedals were operated by heel-and-toeing on the two bright objects seen on the downtube, and that on the far side his raised foot rests on them. Hell on the hamstrings, is what I think. Otherwise, the only method of propulsion I can see are his feet running along the road -- and even I don't believe it.

More, where's the connection between his feet on the supposed pedal and the rear wheel? There's no transmission of power visible. There is some kind of construction in front of the head tube which may be a pivot, with a matching apparent pivot under the "bottom bracket", but that would make the bicycle essentially bottom-tubeless, which I cannot believe either: Jaray was a distinguished graduate of a tough engineering school, chosen by a famous engineering teacher to be his assistant. The other possibility is that the drive is inside the tube, but the conrods would have to be very thin and there doesn't seem to be anything at end of the chainless chainstay big enough to be a right-angle turn for the transmission.

Still not the end of the mysteries. At first glance I took the short strut under the joint of seat and bottom tubes and chainstays (let's be inventive and call it a bottom bracket) to be a flip stand for pulling the bike over and resting it, but on closer inspection I'm less sure. Maybe that is part of the transmission. Or perhaps there is no chainstay at all, and that entire construction starting at his feet and going forward to in front of the head tune, and returning to the assembly under the bottom bracket is the transmission to the "chainstay" which somehow acts as the connecting rod. The downtube of the semi-mixte configuration seems sturdy enough to support this interpretation.

[energyman]

Simple explanation - it's magic !

[Andyb1]

I found this:


1922 J-Rad 'Alemania' Lever Driven Bicycle.
Designed by Paul Jaray, these bicycles were built at the Hesperus Works, Stuttgart between 1922 and 1923.
The first model, of three different versions manufactured, this semi-recumbent bicycle achieves motive power through two swinging levers, via cables to a pair of rear hub-mounted ratchets. The provision of the three steps on each lever, not only allows for different leg lengths, but also a gearing system altering feet positions to make for a more efficient ascent of hills. Further to this facility, the rear hub also has two speeds, operated by a hand lever, just behind the saddle. The front beaded-edge wheel is 18-inches, and the rear 24-inches. Two side-pull calliper brakes are fitted, together with a canvas covered saddle and back rest. Very rare in the market today, this bicycle appears to be in complete condition

The link is

https://www.dominicwinter.co.uk/Auction/Lot/463-1922-j-rad-alemania-lever-driven-bicycle/?lot=161717&sd=1

[Andre Jute]

That's even more complicated than I imagined, Andy. I'm not so sure I don't like the Energyman's explanation -- magic! -- better.

But, seriously, that whole contraction is clever and definitely has echoes in our day, not least in a switchable gearbox enclosed in the rear hub, but also in such esoterica as the Schlumpf ankle-operated two-speed gearbox in the bottom bracket, and shaft drive bicycles offered by Biomega in Denmark when I last looked; test with a few photographs at https://www.cyclingweekly.com/reviews/bike-reviews/biomega-copenhagen-first-ride.

Amazing lengths people will go to in order to lose the dirty chain!

I do realise that longitudinal cranks are not the same as a rotating shaft, but if you squint through a pane of lateral thinking, you too will see they're both mechanisms for avoiding the chain.

[martinf]

Amazing lengths people will go to in order to lose the dirty chain!

Chainglider.

[il padrone]

Lever-cycle. You. can find them being marketed today sometimes. One step away from the chainless shaft-drive, a solution looking for a problem.

Shaft-drive is one of my Five Horsemen of the Bicycle Apocalypse.
- shaft-drive
- automatic gears
- airless tyres
- noseless saddles
- eliptical chainwheels.

All first developed during the bicycle boom of the 1890s. All periodically reinvented and launched on the market as the 'latest new invention'. All never really attaining any ongoing commercial success. There are very good reasons for that.

[Andre Jute]

Amazing lengths people will go to in order to lose the dirty chain!

Chainglider.

Too easy. Real Cyclists <tm> always choose the most difficult way.

[Andre Jute]

Shaft-drive is one of my Five Horsemen of the Bicycle Apocalypse.
- shaft-drive
- automatic gears
- airless tyres
- noseless saddles
- eliptical chainwheels.

My successful fully automatic bike:
http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLINGsmover.html

My successful noseless seat:


The elliptical chainwheel belongs in your Hall of Cycling Infamy. I had one on a Peugeot bike and it was @£$%^&*(.

No experience of airless tyres or shaft drive on bicycles.

[martinf]

The elliptical chainwheel belongs in your Hall of Cycling Infamy. I had one on a Peugeot bike and it was @£$%^&*(.

I had elliptical chainrings (triple, so 3 of them) on my 1990 "mountain bike".

These were Shimano Biopace, only slightly elliptical. They didn't make any noticeable difference to pedalling.

There was a slight downside, the front derailleur adjustment was more fiddly.

They were replaced with round ones once they had worn out.

[il padrone]

There was a slight downside, the front derailleur adjustment was more fiddly.

They were replaced with round ones once they had worn out.

Shimano came out with their Biopace II to deal with the issues. They were a new revelatory design....  ROUND 

[il padrone]

My successful fully automatic bike:
http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLINGsmover.html

My successful noseless seat:


The elliptical chainwheel belongs in your Hall of Cycling Infamy. I had one on a Peugeot bike and it was @£$%^&*(.

No experience of airless tyres or shaft drive on bicycles.

I have not claimed that they have not existed; to the contrary, periodically reinvented as the latest new thing. It is just that while they may be sold, and some people buy them, they are not any ongoing commercial success. Elliptical chainrings are probably the MOST re-invented, and used by some road racers (Biopace, Rotor) but these are still not any success in mass-market adoption.

[Andre Jute]

About the Cyber Nexus automatic gearbox, I would consider a Shimano automatic gearbox taken up by multiple leading manufacturers, indeed declared the wave of the future by the chief executive of an aspirational brand (Koga Miyata), and in production for three decades already, to be a commercial success. That multiple other products collectively sell more units is a very dicey argument to make against so much success. I don't even know that the Cyber Nexus (and associated adaptive suspension and other conveniences like automatic light switching, all offered by the one control centre) aren't still in production and offered on upmarket bikes. Only recently Trek offered a Shimano full-automatic gearbox on a shopping bike in the States.

Furthermore, even if a product like an automatic bike gearbox was only taken up by a manufacturer of the provenance of Gazelle for its top vakansiefiets, the prestige would in many boardrooms that I've been in considered a huge bonus well worth the research and prototyping costs, and a training ground for their young engineers before they are let loose on mass-market products. You have to look at the whole picture.

None of this is speculation. I doubt very much that Shimano lost any money on the project: they've been selling automatic gearboxes, of which the Cyber Nexus was just the most advanced, starting with the three-speed which I remember being available in 1996 when I first became interested, and are still selling an engineering-wise (and for the class of cyclist to which I belong) less impressive electronically-assisted manual gear change derivative in the Dura-Ace Di2 or whatever it is called. That competitors have been forced to develop their own Di2 competitors also speaks volumes.

That's not failure, that's just success that escaped your notice.
***
All the same, I think the automatic gearbox on bicycles became a lost cause as far as the "wave of the future" is concerned on the day that Bernd Rohloff launched his 14-speed gearbox and its associated rotary control, because the great objection of most cyclists who aren't fanatics is the wretched derailleur. The Rohloff (and even older Shimano Nexus version) rotary control is so easily mastered and requires so little attention, that an automatic box becomes much more difficult to justify, and must offer at least the same number of gears; the Rohloff was the game-changer.

[PH]

The fellow in the photo is Paul Jaray, the noted and very influential early aerodynamicist (Zeppelin airships, cars, his Tatra influencing Ferdinand Porsche's Volk's Wagen), in 1921 aboard a bicycle of his own design and construction.

What a fascinating contraption, and how dapper the rider! No need to spoil the look with trouser clips when there's no chain to get caught up in.

[PH]

Lever-cycle. You. can find them being marketed today sometimes. One step away from the chainless shaft-drive, a solution looking for a problem.

Shaft-drive is one of my Five Horsemen of the Bicycle Apocalypse.

I have nothing against the idea of re-invention along the same theme, just because the general idea hasn't worked in the past is no indication it won't in the future.  Up until a few years ago, we could have included belt drives on that list, how many failed attempts to make them commercially popular were there?  It was another of the things that seemed to be re-invented every few years. 

All never really attaining any ongoing commercial success. There are very good reasons for that.

What do you think the reasons are?  IMO it's been efficiency (Inc weight), cycling enthusiasts get obsessed by it and in many markets they've been catered for.  In applications where that efficiency isn't the highest priority, different products are evolving.  The biggest of those markets are of course E-bikes. Automatic gears in particular are a good match for an electric motor, Rohloff and Bosch are amongst others collaborating on such systems. There's also a lot of development going on to combine motor and gearing in the same unit, it makes sense for those to be automated. Then there's continuously variable transmission, another thing deserving to be on the list, several re-inventions over the last 150 years, all failed.  The now popular Enviolo hub was rescued from the failed and bankrupt NuVinci company, that's not only a CVT it can also be automatic. I don't think I've seen shaft drive on an E-bike, I'd be surprised if it wasn't being considered.  It's not unknown in that other market where efficiency isn't the top concern, hire bikes. I've been in several cities where the hire fleets are shaft driven, clean, reliable and low maintenance. The thing maybe most surprising is the longevity of the chain as the primary component, due largely to the dominance of derailleur gears shifting.
Levers rather than pedals requires the reinvention of the bicycle itself, but the current double diamond design and geometry are well entrenched.  There are alternatives, elliptical bicycles (Where you stand) re somewhere between running and pedalling, and have proved themselves on several long distance events. And as a non commercial outsider, Graeme Obree thought levers a good idea for aerodynamic reasons on his recumbent record attempt (Which didn't go very well, but made for a great film: Battle Mountain)
As for the other items on your list, who knows?  Maybe one day someone's airless tyre will work.  There were several failed attempts at pneumatics.  The mid 1800's patented invention gained such little popularity it was reinvented 50 years later.
If at first you don't succeed... 

[Andre Jute]

If at first you don't succeed...

...it's likely because you haven't failed often enough to know which pitfalls to avoid.

Failure is the mother of success.

Whoever said, "Invent the mousetrap and customer will come running," was a prize idiot.

And Englishman, Lord Keynes, explained in vividly simple terms why it is a mistake to look at the producer. Keynes explained that from the production side one is pushing on a rope, which isn't a lever to anything. Consumers have to be ready for a new concept and the product which embodies it, something Il Padrone was hinting at earlier.

That's presumably why engineers again and again try to make people buy elliptical chainwheels.

There are some products that in a world run by engineers might seem rational but which defy common sense which in turn means will resist buying it.

I have a lot of respect for the common sense of consumers.